Elite_Marksman

Slightly closer to anarchy than police state, but pretty damn close to the middle.

If you can show me a civilization where people are free to protest any where, at any time, without any regard for the lives of the people who may live or otherwise conduct business where the protest is taking place and I will show you complete and absolute anarchy. There is a vast difference between having the right to protest and the right to impose undue hardship on the people who live or work where you are protesting.

I don't think anyone here is making excuses for people who abuse their power, be they police, politicians, or the McDonalds mangager. One can be compliant with the laws that your duly elected representatives have decided to pass with your consent without condoning or accepting people who abuse their authority. Police who make a habit (or even the first time if it's serious enough) of using excessive force or frivolous charges will not long be employed, especially with the number of people willing to perform the job at it is intended. I am not saying that abuse does not happen at the hands of police, but rather that abuse is, despite what you see on TV, the exception to the rule. The vast majority of officers do not want to be involved in physical conflicts with people they contact because doing so greatly increases the chances that they will be injured. Believe it or not, cops are people just like you, they want to get through their day with as little stress and danger as possible so they can go home and kiss their wife and kids goodnight.

They just put in two circles on the entrance to my college, and another inside the college. For the amount of traffic on those roads, circles are far more efficient than traffic lights. However, near where I work they just removed a hybrid traffic light-circle abomination and replaced it with a modified cloverleaf. For the amount of traffic (they estimate 100k cars a day) through that intersection the circle was pretty much impossible to get through, the flyover is a lot better. I have noticed quite a few people going the wrong way (clockwise), as well as failing to yield to vehicles already in the circle at the ones near my college.

When they aren't false I have no problem with them being used in a trial. But when the accusations have been proven to be false they have to place in any trials. And cops are paranoid for a very good reason, IT KEEPS THEM ALIVE. Police assume every person they come into contact with is armed and has no problem killing them, because the one time they assume the 85 year old grandma is just an 85 year old grandma, she really has a warrant out for arrest and isn't going to go to jail, so she shoots the cop. For this reason, if you are ever contacted by the police, anything you do that helps them feel safe greatly increases the chance that you'll get off with a warning instead of a ticket.

I would actually argue that in the specter of Brady v. Maryland police actually need MORE protections. A false accusation of excessive force, a jilted lover falsely reporting domestic violence, and many other similar circumstances, must be recorded in a police officer's personnel file. If the officer is ever in a position where he or she has to testify as to why the amount of force they used is appropriate, these false allegations must be turned over to the defense and will certainly be used by the defense to attempt to attack the officer's credibility, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE FALSE ALLEGATIONS.

If you google askew it tilts the screen too.

If the DoD doesn't want it talked about, it doesn't get patented.

Having not driven a Tesla I can't comment on that unfortunately. However, I did remember one downside to driving a stick. It makes it much hard to do things with the lady friends, not that I have that problem at the moment sadly.

Eh, CVTs just don't have the same feel as a manual. And don't even get me started on those flappy paddle craps, if it doesn't have three pedals, I don't want it.

No, this missing part of this quote.

And to be arrested, and to make the evening news? This, laying face down on the tarmac with a M4 aimed at you is not a fun way to start the day, trust me on that one.

OK so what kid says "When I grow up i want to be a Mars Rover!" http://images.wikia.com/simpsons/images/e/e4/Ralph.gif NO KIDS use to say they wanted to be pilots, and astronauts and would look up and admire what we had done for them! Now, what is a kid looking up to? What do they aspire to be? Hedge fund managers? Reality tv stars? George Mallory (1886-1924), answer to the question 'Why do you want to climb Mt. Everest ?'. "Because it is there." As an older engineer once told me "Engineers today...can't justify a two door over powered convertible that sounds like a unhitched lion that melts panties and puts a smile on your face from ear to freaking ear!" while drinking his Bourbon straight and dreaming of what could have been if we grew our balls back! normiss That photo....TITS! Well, when I was a kid, which wasn't all that long ago, I wanted to a pilot. To the point where I enrolled in AFROTC and was willing to have LASIK in order to qualify for a pilot slot, until one of my doctors a few years ago claimed I had exercise induced asthma, which I don't, but that's a whole different story... Now, I want to be an engineer and am 3 years from graduating from Drexel with a BS in Computer Engineering. Kids today still want to grow up and be pilots, they still want to grow up and be engineers, they still want to do everything they wanted to do 20 years ago... And I would really like the hear the part of that quote that you omitted, because it really doesn't make any sense at all the way you wrote it.

We still have a space program. It may not be sending as many manned missions, but there are a large number of important satellites that are launched every year. The reason we no longer have a commercial aircraft that can do mach 1 is because it is far more efficient to carry 400 people at .85 mach than 100 people at mach 2. The Concorde burned almost three times as much fuel per passenger mile than a first-gen 747. There is a reason it (and the Tu-144) were the ONLY civilian airliners to use afterburning low-bypass turbojet engines. All modern airliners use non-afterburning, high-bypass turbofan engines.

Actually, from an engineering standpoint all of those things have changed quite considerably. Yes, we still burn hydrocarbons to heat our homes, but we do it several orders of magnitude more efficiently than we did 200 years ago. Cooling? Until 60 years ago refrigeration and air conditioning pretty much didn't exist. You cooled your home by opening the windows, now we have fairly efficient air conditioners. The entire agricultural system is vastly more efficient than it was in the past. From more productive crops and techniques to more efficient distribution systems, the agriculture of the early 20th century would simply not be able to feed the 7 billion souls on this planet. And there is no reason we couldn't go to the moon tomorrow. The reason it isn't happening isn't because we don't have the technology, it's because the costs involved have been deemed to not be worth the benefit.

So hurt her, and let her get on with her life. And sure, we tend to gravitate towards people with similar backgrounds - but I've never heard a lack of university education used as a specific reason for avoiding getting serious. This seems bizarre to me, but then Skymama mentioned that she used to feel the same way. The difference is that she was open to changing her mind. One of the reasons my ex claims she broke up with me is because I changed my major from Criminal Justice to Computer Engineering and it meant that I would graduate 2 years after her instead of the year before her...

Not taking sides at all here, but the FAA isn't going to fine someone $1,000,000 because they are "out to get him," there wouldn't be fines, let alone fines this big, if there wasn't at the very least improper documentation of the maintenance. Even if the planes were maintained correctly, like with all other things pertaining to the government, and life in general, if it isn't documented, it didn't happen.

EDIT - No, not THAT Michelle McLaughlin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjFCMNQkyJE&feature=BFa&list=AVGxdCwVVULXe9olsQpmW8WAYZ4g-Ay2lW&lf=list_related This is exactly why things like Pandora should exist and remain free. Without Pandora I would never have heard this wonderful pianist's music. There aren't many solo pianists I like, but her music is just amazing. Strangely enough Pandora threw this up on my Apocalypto channel, but I'm not complaining.

I had to check my phone to make sure it's not April 1st. And now I'm just that much more confused.

This, really. If it's something that can't be discussed because its classified or an industry secret, it isn't patented. Patents are open to the public, it's just illegal to make or use the concepts in them without authorization of the patent owner.

Played through single player and play custom games online every couple of weeks.

No ads here, AB+ and NoScript will do that though.

Guns DO NOT kill people. Guns to not randomly decide to fire. PEOPLE kill people. Whether it be intentional, leaving the firearm unattended where a child can reach it, believing that a firearm is unloaded when it is not. A loaded gun sitting on your kitchen table will not just one day fire, if you drop it, or start playing with it it just may, but if it is left alone it will not fire. With the gun safety my grandfather and uncles taught me, it is highly unlikely that either they or myself will have an accidental discharge. In fact, in my grandfather's 65 years of hunting and two of my uncle's 35 years each of hunting, they claim they have never had an accidental discharge. Also, one sure way of minimizing any risk even if there is an accidental discharge is to ensure that the muzzle is NEVER pointed at something you don't want a hole in. I have no issue with firearm safety courses being required as a condition to own firearms, but to say "guns are evil" and leave it at that is bullshit.

As for the extremist position, yes I realize a few of my positions are considered "extremist." Mainly because I am a libertarian and just want the gov't to leave me (and everyone else) the fuck alone. For example, in the NJ election next Tuesday, there is a referendum to amend our state constitution to allow betting on sporting events. Personally, I do not believe people should gamble, as it is a wasteful use of money and can lead to serious problems. However, I also believe that I have absolutely no right to tell another person what they can or can not do (outside the universally accepted prohibitions, such as murder, theft, etc.). So I will be voting in favor, even though I personally disagree with the subject of the amendment.